Coombes v Roads and Traffic Authority & Ors (No 2) [2007] NSWCA 70

Coombes v Roads and Traffic Authority & Ors (No 2) [2007] NSWCA 70

Bombala Council's failure to make timely admissions regarding responsibility for the roadworks compelled the appellant to maintain proceedings against other parties, making it fair for Bombala Council to bear the costs of the RTA and the appellant's costs in those claims; an offer of compromise capable of acceptance was made and not accepted, engaging solicitor/client (indemnity) costs at trial, but not for the appeal, absent unreasonable conduct.

Parties
Appellant: Anne Marie Coombes; First Respondent: Roads & Traffic Authority; Second Respondent: Bombala Council; Third Respondent: Stephen John Frece
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 March 2007
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Post Judgment Costs Determination
Outcome
Orders made for Bombala Council to pay costs of the RTA and appellant under Sanderson order, costs at trial on solicitor/client basis, costs on appeal on party/party basis, verdicts and costs orders on cross-claims as specified.
Legal Topics
Costs, Bullock and Sanderson Orders, Indemnity Costs, Offer of Compromise, Contribution, Road Accident Negligence
Civil Procedure Tort Law Costs Bullock and Sanderson Orders Indemnity Costs Offer of Compromise Contribution Road Accident Negligence

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 24 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Anne Marie Coombes

Appellant

Roads & Traffic Authority

First Respondent

Bombala Council

Second Respondent

Stephen John Frece

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Post Judgment Costs Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Should Bombala Council pay the costs of the RTA incurred on the appellant's claim against the RTA?
  2. 2 Should Bombala Council pay the costs of the third respondent that the appellant has been ordered to pay?
  3. 3 Should Bombala Council pay the appellant's costs on an indemnity basis?

Ratio Decidendi

Bombala Council's failure to make timely admissions regarding responsibility for the roadworks compelled the appellant to maintain proceedings against other parties, making it fair for Bombala Council to bear the costs of the RTA and the appellant's costs in those claims; an offer of compromise capable of acceptance was made and not accepted, engaging solicitor/client (indemnity) costs at trial, but not for the appeal, absent unreasonable conduct.

Court Disposition

Orders made for Bombala Council to pay costs of the RTA and appellant under Sanderson order, costs at trial on solicitor/client basis, costs on appeal on party/party basis, verdicts and costs orders on cross-claims as specified.

Orders

  • Order Bombala Council to pay RTA's costs incurred on the appellant's claim against the RTA at trial and on appeal, to be paid directly to the RTA.
  • Declare costs of appellant ordered by Court be paid by Bombala Council, including appellant's costs of prosecuting her claim against the RTA, at trial and on appeal.